beta
Text
1. The judgment of the first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim changed in the trial, shall be modified as follows:
In this case.
Reasons
Basic Facts
With respect to this part, the relevant part of the grounds for the judgment of the first instance shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
Opinions of the Parties
A. The plaintiffs' claim 1) The registration of the creation of the first collateral mortgage against the defendant C is set falsely without the secured debt for the purpose of evading the creditors' compulsory execution against F. 2) The secured debt of the first collateral mortgage exists in household affairs.
Even if the secured claim is the cause of KRW 250,00,000,000 for the claim for the return of the lease deposit under a lease agreement between F and Defendant C. ① Defendant C did not pay the lease deposit to F, so there is no security deposit to be returned. ② Even if the security deposit was paid, the Plaintiff claimed that it was 23 months from April 1, 2012 to January 2, 2014 at the time when the purchase price was paid in full, but the termination period is specified in the preparatory document dated October 25, 2014, and the total sum of the above periods is 21 months.
Since it is not sufficient to fully pay the rent that occurred during the period, the deposit to be refunded when deducted from the above deposit is not more than KRW 66,000,000, and ③ the claim to return the deposit remains.
Even if there is no secured claim due to the full repayment prior to the date of distribution of the instant case.
B. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) The second collateral mortgage creation registration also was made with intent to evade the creditors' compulsory execution against F. 2) Even if the secured debt of the second collateral mortgage exists, Defendant D is not a director of F but is a major shareholder under Article 542-8 (2) 6 of the Commercial Act, and thus, Defendant D's establishment registration of the establishment of the second collateral mortgage on the real estate of this case owned by F. However, the above registration is null and void unless the second collateral creation registration was made without the approval of the FF board of directors.
3 The secured claim of the second priority mortgage exists.